Game has been playing 5 and 6 handed for a few hours, but recently got down to 3 handed. This is generally a little shorter than I prefer to play, especially considering our main villain. I think both us of are mainly continuing to play for 2 reasons... 1 - to keep the game going in case more players arrive. 2 - because villain 2 is an unknown fish who is playing ultra tight and letting us bull doze him.

Villain 1 - probably the biggest winner in the player pool. switches gears really well, can be very aggressive and hand reads well. can float flops very wide also.

Villain 2 - unknown. showed up about 2 hours ago, bought in for $1000 and has been playing very weak tight. a few hands previous he folded and showed the 2nd nut straight on a non low, non paired, non flush board to my 1/2 pot bet while we were 3 handed. i was really surprised. granted, he was right, i did have the nuts but i think that's a very tight fold 3 handed for a single bet getting 3 to 1.

Hero - winning image. have loosened up a good bit since we have been 3 handed and have been picking up a bunch of small pots.

Hero (bu) - $1500
Villain 1 (sb) - covers
Villain 2 (bb) - $700

We have A K T 4 9

Preflop:

We raise to $15, both villains call.

Flop: 3 ways, $45

7 5 T
checks to us and we bet $25, Villain 1 calls, hero folds.

Turn: heads up, $95

8
villain checks, we check. (???) bet with 9-high flush and 4-1 low?

River: heads up, $95

T
Villain leads for $35. We raises to $135. He quickly clicks it back to $235.

My initial reaction is that Villain may have called the flop very wide, especially short handed. Checked back the turn with very little and then bet the river to try to take it down for a small price, thinking that I just c-bet the flop and would give up the river after checking the turn. The min-raise on the river is confusing though.

I have never seen him make such a raise but I also block tens full and I kind of doubt he plays the hand so passively on the flop and turn with a flopped set. It also seems unlikely that he plays a big flush like this: missing value on the turn when he has an image of being aggressive and having a wide range, and then raising once the board pairs.

I think not betting the turn was a mistake and even though this is not a big pot or anything, I think it was pretty interesting.

Turn is an obvious check for me, river is an obvious call.

I have no idea why you are raising river. As played call I guess.

Amok: no bet on the turn in a 3 handed game? I assume you're correct, but I am surprised. Thought not betting was a mistake on my part.

Also, I raised the river for a few reasons. Mainly, to possibly fold out non nut lows and flushes, especially since i generally have a tight image. I don't think villain expects a raise from me here with a non nutted handed.

I would hate to split or 3/4 or worse this pot when i call the weak $35 bet and he rolls over A3 low and/or a J-high flush.

Perhaps my thinking is flawed here, but this was my line of thought.

I don't think you should be betting the turn just because only 3 players were dealt cards. You should play the same way you do normally, just adjust to pre-flop ranges.

I don't think raising river is horrible, but your hand is clearly strong enough to call so there is no need to turn it into a bluff.

What would you think on the river if I didn't have the Tc blocking so many full houses?

IE: I only have 9 high flush and 4-1 low?

Then calling would be the only sensible option IMO.

I'm following amok's line checking turn, calling river. Too much risk for the raise in this relatively small pot where we have plenty of showdown value relative to our hand strength. Generally speaking of course w/the showdown we don't wanna bloat the pot whereas if we have complete junk, or more nuttier hands we're trying to get more in. Too me looks like a good cheap showdown given that he could be which it now looks more likely inducing also..